Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bono Recounts Fight With Steve Jobs Over (Product) RED Branding, Urges Apple to Do More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hmmm. I didn't realize that a single logo counted as having "huge logos splashed all over".
All over? I count *one* Apple logo on my iPhone, *one* on my iPad, *one* on my iPod, *one* on my MacBook Pro.
Notice the theme there? *One* logo per object, usually on the side *not* facing the user. Compare that to the logo count on your typical PC when you pull it out of the box. You have:the brand (Dell, HP, etc.) usually in more than one place, the Intel Inside or AMD logo, 2-4 logos on the optical drive *alone*, and the Windows sticker. Sometimes you even have a sticker or two relating to the graphics chipset.
Note: I'm not counting the functional logos on any box. (The ones which label the various port types.) They have a functional purpose, and *most* of the time they are discrete, regardless of the brand you're dealing with.
----------
Fortunately, most of those diety-forsaken stickers can be peeled off without even leaving any residue. (The gunk-leaving miscreants know who they are!)
Bono has worked tirelessly for the African HIV cause; therefore I was more than a little taken aback by his public airing of some behind-the-scenes-goings-on, that occurred years ago, with Apple, one of (product) Red's major benefactors.
Speaking ill of the dead is never a gracious thing, because they're not here to repudiate a story, or defend themselves against certain allegations. Now I wouldn't go so far as to say Bono did just that, but he certainly very publicly complained about Apple's 'quiet involvement', which at this late stage is a bit tacky, especially in light of the millions raised by Apple for combatting HIV thru (product) Red.
Speaking ill of the dead is never a gracious thing, because they're not here to repudiate a story, or defend themselves against certain allegations. Now I wouldn't go so far as to say Bono did just that, but he certainly very publicly complained about Apple's 'quiet involvement', which at this late stage is a bit tacky, especially in light of the millions raised by Apple for combatting HIV thru (product) Red.
If there was a logo printed on the front of Product Red products then I probably wouldn't buy them if the same product in a different colour could be had without the logo. I think Apple is doing it right in this case. I think a small amount of sales going to the cause is fine...I don't want my personal products to be walking billboards for non profit organisations. If they want to spread their logo throw in a sticker similar to what Apple does with its logo and hopefully a few people will attach it to their car or something.
I'm well aware of all of this. I'm a fan of the band and I know the "talking points" that get trotted out. So no, not shocking. For example, ONE wouldn't actually give money out as it's primary task as it is an ADVOCACY GROUP. So it makes sense that administration costs are the highest bill inside it. Heck, some of your reputable links are of the "THE NWO is out to get us!" ilk. (The caption writing is such flame bait it's sad. Such winners as "Madame evil and best friend of mass pedophile Jimmy Savile, Queen Elizabeth II.")
You can throw all of this out there and it still doesn't make him an idiot to push for more for the charitable causes he throws his weight behind. That was my point.
And it's not like Apple also doesn't try to fight for every loop-hole they can as well while still giving to charitable causes. See the pattern?
Last edited:
I didn't realize Mr. Rand outranked Steve when it came to choosing the name/logo for Steve's new company.
Overall it's been a good thing, but Bono is going to try to get more for (RED) whenever he can.
I don't think he's a jerk, nor is Apple. He doesn't have to use his popularity to help fight HIV/AIDS. Those who complain about Bono's actions aren't walking in his shoes.
I don't think he's a jerk, nor is Apple. He doesn't have to use his popularity to help fight HIV/AIDS. Those who complain about Bono's actions aren't walking in his shoes.
If you watch the video, Bono's anecdote about Steve got laughs, even Ive laughed. People here are taking his comments way too seriously.
If you think GMOs are bad, YOU'RE the moron because you fall for the shysters who spread that anti-GMO propaganda and junk "science" that has been long debunked. He promotes GMOs because a) 1,000s of studies from a variety of sources show there's nothing wrong with them and b) They are the only way we are going to be able to feed everyone on this world with climate change making land and growing conditions increasingly hostile to crops. But it's hard to be the voice of reason when so many people are more likely to believe people who spread conspiracy theories about everything (and make money doing it).
p.s. Monsanto is only one of many companies that sell GMOs and have been for years. We've all been eating GMOs for years (unless you grow ALL your own food).
Last edited:
I think some people forget that there'd be mass starvation if it wasn't for our modified food supply. Still, keep studying it just to be responsible without flipping our lids at the same time.
Because he made a big deal about a logo. Apple generates a lot of money towards AIDS research just by selling red-colored things. They know how to market a product, and (my guess,) they probably figured that out of their collection of cases and covers, less customers might buy a Product Red case if it has a big logo sprawled across it. They might decide to get a different Apple case, or a different brand case that happens to be red. These are all things I imagine Jobs might've considered.
And there's Bono, who in spite of the revenue generated towards curing AIDS, wants to break balls over the size of the logo and whether the parenthesis distracts from it. Now, I suppose Bono could genuinely believe that if other people see somebody holding an iPad with "(Product) RED" written on it, they might look it up, say "Hey, they're fighting AIDS!" and go make a donation later that day, but it just looks like he just wanted more attention from the world to placate his ego or keep himself relevant so when he puts out another album people might be likely to buy it. I realize that's kind of paranoid, I'm just stating how it might come off to some of us.
Apple already advertises the purpose behind Product Red, and plastering the name in larger print or in plain view isn't going to do much of anything for viewers who don't already know what it is, it'll just annoy people who wanted a red case. I believe the idea isn't to get the message out with these accessories, but to tap into the revenue that comes from purchasing an exclusive color case and putting it to good use.
Personally, if I were spearheading a charity that helps cure a terrible disease, I'd be happy that one of the most valuable brands in the entire world is successfully generating millions of dollars towards my cause, rather than complaining that it isn't advertised enough.
I don't have a problem with the guy personally, but reading stuff like this makes me think a little less of him.
Aptly put! Glad to see I'm not the only one annoyed by those appearance-defacing irritants ..
Honestly, I disagree with Bono in every point. The parentheses in the logo look pretty wanna-be trendy, like Web 2.0 startups that regularly have dots in their logos. Given the serious topics that (RED) is involved in, it's kind of unfitting, but that's just my opinion. And seriously, I always thought the point of (RED)-products was to give the possibility of charity without having to deal with a compromised product. And for me, obnoxious branding, especially with the flashy (RED)-logo, definitely IS compromised, as simplicity and minimalism is one of the key features of Apple's design. And I guess Apple would have sold a lot less, if they put (RED)'s ugly logo on the products.
I gotta say, I watch the video, and it just doesn't strike me as that big of a deal... he even got a compliment in about how phones got smaller thanks to Apple. ;-)
Well, there are different aspects to every story, but I believe his original intentions were noble, and the alternative certainly can't be letting millions of people, and especially infants, die of a preventable disease.
Darn it, I look like the fanboy in here, but only because these articles aren't completely correct. If the only thing Bono wanted to do was aid, then yes, there'd be a point to that.
But giving aid to Africa is only part of the idea. It's also about giving them ways to prop themselves up, debt forgiveness, etc. These are ideas that acknowledge that it takes more than one approach to solve a problem this big.
The only thing that will really help Africa is a total change of government and ideology. But alas the western powers seem more than content with Africa just the way it us, who knows maybe one day they'll find massive oil reserves and the west will bomb them to get it?
Apple does pay its taxes. It just keeps its over seas profits in Ireland because to bring it to the US would tax it 30% which is ridiculous when it was never sold in the US.